1998 is adopted as part of our record in approving this project and that i think the concept plan does achieve the goals of what's referred to in the staff report for ada compliance, environmental education and to also boost attendance at the zoo can we make this into one motion or -- i move we approve the san francisco zoological society conceptual plan for the renovation of the eleanor friend playground, adopt finds ining our package under exhibit 3, acknowledging the mitigation and reporting program measures which are recommended in the staff report. i just want to add that will be for construction or completion, particularly on monitoring animal behavior. adopt a seek what finding,

adopt the monitoring and reporting requirements and approve the conceptual plan, finding that it is consistent with the zoo master plan. >> second that. >> it's been moved and seconded. any questions? seeing none, all in favor. >> aye. >> opposed? hearing none, it is unanimous, thank you. >> we are now on item 8, which is 181 fremont street.

third presentation in 16 hours so karen brodak before you on 181 fremont street. the item before you is discussion and possible action to recommend to the planning commission the net shadow pr proposed 181 fremont will not have adverse impact on use of union square pursuant to planning code section 295, the sunlight ordinance. b, portion be allocated to the proposed project 181 fremont street and adopt finding under the california environmental quality act and adopt mitigation monitoring and reporting. we presented this item for review at the capital committee. we are speaking on the same presentation. we provided a bit more information as you

received, an additional attachment under attachment e. you received updated exhibit 1 also under e. so full packet should be available to you. i should be able to do a presentation. joined by kevin guy from the planning department. if you have questions for him as well. thank you. >> as you can see this is a map of the transit center district plan that this commission also reviewed with the planning commission in october. the 181 fremont site is identified with an arrow. here is a map that shows the vicinity of the project. the project is a 54 with seven residential unit,

qualifies for lead gold, environmental certification program. here is a few renderings of the project, both at street level and more detailed depictions. there is a green space that surrounds the building. a couple of things that might be of particular interest to this commission is fact that the project includes an elevator. this is adjacent to the transbay center, which has a large park. will have a large new park above it. this would provide for public access. public lobby and rest rooms are something we are always interested in that will allow people to access this park. this is the sky bridge to the new park. here are a couple images provided by project

sponsors. they render images how this building may appear. this project included in the plan provide amenities and also fees that go toward certain public benefits that have been discussed and considered in the transbay plan, including open space, street and transportation, downtown art fee, art work fund, child care fee, among other fees. this also does pay into a fund that provides improvements to open spaces inside but often outside the plan area that we discussed in the october 11th hearing. i will talk about the shadow. this was analyzed in the october 11th presentation

that you saw. the analysis of this shadow was included within those shadow images and the presentation including the slide shows that you all saw. as we said at that time we would be coming back when we have specific shadow with more detail from specific projects. again, 181 fremont was included in that shadow analysis as an unsculpted form. 181 was applied by the planning staff here today and analyzed. the specific shadow analysis was included, included in your packet as you received memo from esa, the environmental consultants that did that further analysis. both analysis at that time and at that time show new shadows on prop k park except for union square. about the detail on union square from 181 fremont. this occurs two weeks in

the year. the week of august 16th and april 24th. it occurs for five minutes, from 7:25 to 7:30 a.m. the 181 fremont project is approximately two-thirds of a mile from union square. the amount is.0005 of total available -- total available annual sun laoegt. .003 of the existing budget. this amount of shadow was available before both commissioners took action on the 11th. included in your packet, we have also included images that show shadow on non prop k parks. that is why in your packet you will see that we show a shadow on parks other than union square, the only park shadowed by this project

that falls under prop k. so here you see the shadow that -- go to the video now. this is a video that shows how the shadow falls. because the shadow falls for a very quick period of time you can't actually see the shadow. as it passes, i'm going to quickly pause. the lower left-hand corner, that is union square. that is the little blue sliver you can see on union square. it occurs basically when the sunlight lines up in such a way that made lane allow for that sunlight to be cast for a moment. here is the zoo, where you can see the orange strip. again, from 7:25 to 7:30 a.m. here is where that shadow is cast on union square.

so again the actually design has been sculpted and been refined from earlier height of 875 to 700. think i'm going to ask kevin guy to come up and talk a bit about that. one thing i wanted to mention before i turn it over. included in your finding is an analysis that was done of usage at that time in union square. there was very minimal usage at that time. mostly members of the public passing through the square quickly. the cafe was open, though they don't generally have a lot of customers at that time or seating. but there were people inside the cafe at that time. just to understand that is why we anticipate use would not be impacted by this shadow. kevin.

>> thank you. kevin guy with planning department staff. couple things i would like to note as a refreshing from your joint hearing in october. the height limitations for new buildings in the center plan area and bulk regulations that talk about how buildings should be sculpted and act on the skyline, those were set very much with an eye toward trying to minimize shadow impacts of new development on section 295 and parks and other open spaces. the mere -- for individual projects the mere act of complying with those is in and of itself a means of addressing prop k impacts, sort of build in, as it were. specific to the project, if we can get that up, the top

portion that reaches up to a spire, those are decorative features that are above sort of the habitable floors of the building. the shadow being cast on union square is partly contributed by habitable portions of the building but part is cast by the decorative features. the decorative features are actually primarily open. they are clear glass surrounded by these relatively thin structural members and the spire. what you are seeing is a bit different from the reality of how the shadows would act in real life. the sun obviously would pass through the clear glass. because of the distance between this building and union square, any shadow that would potentially be cast by the sort of structural elements at the very top would actually --

if they appear at all, would appear sort of light gray. very diffuse in color because of the nature of the sun. the light being able to pass around at great distances. there is sort of a technical clarification. obviously it shows number the graphics as a hard line being cast by the spire. i'm available for the technicalities there. >> karen money brodak from the department. the item before you is to recommend to the planning commission the following -- the actions included in your packet and adopt we have included a draft resolution under attachment e for your consideration.

thank you very much. >> is there anyone who would like to make public comment. please come forward. >> president, commissioners, dan kingsley, with sks investments. we are the sponsor. we are here to answer questions you may v. we appreciate your consideration this morning. thank you. >> thank you. >> jeffrey hiller. we are the architects and are available. one of the things about this project that we are especially pleased about is the bridge to the roof park of the transbay, which i think is going to be one of those really special and useful pieces of this concept. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any other public comment on this item? being none, public comment is closed. >> commissioner lowe. >> thank you, president

beal. this did come before the capitol committee. we did move this matter to the full commission for the following reason the matter was heard by the capital committee we didn't have a full package. we do now have a full package, included in your package, which is the mitigation monitoring and reporting program. certificate of determination and exemption from environmental review. and a community benefit plan. so we do now have a complete package. we did move this to the general calendar with the recommendation of approval. i would like make the motion to have this project approved. >> commissioner, is it the resolution that you would like to adopt that is in your binder? >> yes. >> thank you. >> commissioner. >> prior to seconding my colleague's motion, i want to say a week ago i was contacted by the head of the union square association karen flood. she said their association

was supportive. i think that is and important vote of approval. so with that if there is nothing elsely second commissioner lowe's motion. >> commissioner bonia. >> i just wanted to thank the project sponsors for preparing the mitigation program. speaking for myself i think it would have been difficult to support it without that program in place. because i know how difficult it is for the community to deal with these types of projects. even with this -- with the program you have proposed, i know it is not going to be easy. i know it is going to cause great inconveniences and hardships for the community residing around the project. >> thank you.

it's been moved and second. all in favor, opposed? it is unanimous, thank you. >> item 9, water conservation project. >> good morning commissioners. before you is discussion and possible action to approve the memorandum of understanding between recreational park department and public commission for implementation for alamo park water conservation project. the p.u.c. extends grant assistance for retrofits and encouraging large water uses to implement necessary retrofits to maximize our ability to realize real water savings through conservation measures and innovative practices. in 2011 the department partnered with the p.u.c. to develop a plan for 12

parks where the most water can be conserved. alamo square was ranked within the top five of the consumer parks but had high potential for water conservation. as a result -- i will use the overhead here. alamo square will be the fourth park we have been able to implement this in. previous projects include alta plaza, a 900,000 reward, replacing the irrigation controller and install drought tolerant no-month grass and improve drainage. balboa park, 120,000 grant reward. we replaced the booster pump and raised the sunken boxes and improved the irrigation line. lastly, those in jefferson square in the western addition, with over a million in a grant reward

replaced the entire system, installed a state-of-the-art system, no-month grass and drought tolerant landscaping features throughout the perimeter of that large park. have not been through there recently and will take the consensus down the first week in december. it's been a transformative project for us. let's see. in february of this year the department submitted the required application documents for this project. it ranks as one of the highest water using parks of all of our parks in our entire system. the water use is over 7 million gallons, 23.7 acre feet for your water geeks.

which covers the 9.4 irrigated acres that comprise over four city blocks of that large and iconic park. the alamo square project that we propose, this mou would cover anyway would cover this need within the park. the current system there we have a leaking irrigation system that is over 30 years old. more stunningingly we have a corroded coupler line, over 70 years old which far exceeds life cycle of that time. we have low water pressure in the park, which impacts our water distribution in the existing irrigation system. we have an inefficient irrigation system design and layout difficult to maintain lawn and steep slopes and underutilized areas.

this is the actual need we have. in june of this year we were awarded by the puc the -- a grant in the amount of 1,318,485 to undertake this project, which requires the mou before you today. that particular project we have proposed would address these particular items. it would replace irrigation system. replace that completely quick cover line, install a booster pump to increase water pressure, improve irrigation system layout and design, replace unusable turf with drought tolerant plantings, where appropriate in park design, and install a weather-based smart irrigation controller. with this project complete our estimated water reduction would be one-third reduction or

$2,545,192 gallons annually, which is very substantive. that being the project that we proposed, the puc has made available this money for the project. it is available to the end of fiscal year 13-14. their grant funding covers 57% of the total project costs. remaining 43% of the alamo square cost would be subsidized by the department's capital budget in the amount not to exceed 1 million. if you would approve the mou today and once it is executed, the department must complete this particular project within two years or forfeit the grant receipts unless otherwise agreed. so the proposed mou before you is attached to your package outlines and describes the requirements of this particular project

that it would govern. the time line, if you were to approve, would be the following. you can see on the slide here -- i'm reiterating how the costs are allocated between the two departments in our project time line that we would undertake community outreach in january through march. back before you here at the commission with the actual capital project in april. construction documents made through august. award of contract the end of next year with construction in february through july of 2014. then have the project complete and ready to reopen in august of 2014. this project is supported by the alamo square neighborhood association. some of which members are here today. we do not know of any opposition and recommendation before you

is approval of the proposed memorandum of understanding between our department and the p.u.c. to implement this project. >> commissioner harrison. >> excuse me lack of familiarity with no mow grass. is that decorative, like mondo? >> not exactly. it is a california native. if you have been past alta project, you will see it on the steep slopes fronting steiner and clay streets. it tufts and mounds. by the description design not to mow. it does have somewhat of a water quotient but lower than regular turf. of course it is more maintenance-free. we don't have to do the mowing. we propose to put it on the non-usable areas, like at alta plaza we have steep slopes that are difficult

to mow and are not really usable for park users because of the grade. you can also see it at cavello park. >> the puc is using it at sunset reservoir and the medians. i think a little at jefferson. >> there is some along the eddy of the jefferson street project. >> it looks like green uncut hair. >> but beautiful hair, wouldn't you say? >> denny, what part -- >> chia pet. >> what part of cavallo point. on the playground? >> the playground they actually mow but in between murray circle and the main office, then interspersed between some of the -- the hillsides area, there is no mow. >> in other words, we can't use it on a putting green?

>> your ball won't go in the hole. >> it would change the game. >> commissioner bonia. >> yes. the water usage, 7,718,612 gallons we are using in this park. is any non -- poetable water or -- >> all that is poetable. be substantial water conservation. >> you are saying all is -- >> poetable. >> all poetable. so all this time we have been using all this water. >> yes. >> wow. >> irrigation and -- >> that is phenomenal. >> with outright leaks in this. >> i would say this is long

overdue. >> thank you. >> is there public comment? please come forward. >> i'm katrina, on the board of the alamo square neighborhood association. i wanted to confirm dennis's comment that we are very supportive of this. we have been following it closely. we are excited we are going to get a new irrigation system and conserve more water and will work closely with community who's communicate what is going on as the various stages happen and make that go more smoothly. we are meeting with the project manager, marvin ye, and talking about how this will affect replanting and tree removal. what we can do to really take our park to the next level. and make good decisions now as this is designed so we can have a beautiful park in 100 years. thank you.

>> thank you. >> any other public comment on this item? >> good morning, commissioners. thank you for having this item on your agenda today. my name is gus hernandez, editor of the alamo square news letter. i also want to offer my support for this irrigation plant, long overdue. like commissioner bonia said. you know, we are very excited about . this we are going to be partnering with your department and park and rec and puc to mack sure the outreach is done properly. our news letter goes out every other month. we will cover and provide updates in the news letter, thank you. >> thank you. >> is there anyone else? being none, public comment is closed. >> commissioners? moved by commissioner -- >> second. >> seconded by commissioner bonia. all in favor, opposed. hearing none, that is yan, thank you. >> we are now on item 10.

the transit center district plan priorities for open space impact fee revenues. >> good morning, commissioners. recreation parks department. apologize for my voice. the fact you got your staff report late due my sniffles. as you recall in september this commission held an informational hearing on the transit center district plan where you heard about plan developments, transit improvements, planned open space, as well as shadow impacts. in addition you were presented with impact fees with information on impact fees that would be paid by developers within the project. and the next study that was the basis for those fees was presented at that september hearing. during that conversation we talked about the fact that there will be impact fees that will stay within the plan area. then there are a portion of

the impact fees, 12.5 million, that can be spent outside of the plan area on open space. on october 9th you probably all remember instead of watching the giants win their league and advance to the nlcs you had the shadow hearing where we talked about shadow impacts and you jointly approved with the planning commission. but also about the public benefits as well as impact fees. subsequently october 18th the planning commission adopted what is known as transit center district plan implementation document. which intended to summarize the area. this funding was associated. the allocation of types of different infrastructure and implementation mechanisms